US 6415207

Analysis of U.S. Patent 6,415,207

Date of Analysis: May 11, 2026

This report provides a concise summary of United States Patent 6,415,207, including its bibliographic details and a plain-language overview of its independent claims. A search of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) dockets for 2026 was also conducted.

Patent Summary

Title	System and method for automatically providing vehicle status information
Assignee	At the time of this report, the assignee of record is SHIPPING AND TRANSIT, LLP. The patent has a history of several assignments, originally granted to Global Research Systems Inc.
Inventor(s)	Martin Kelly Jones
Filing Date	March 1, 2000
Issue Date	July 2, 2002
Abstract	The patent describes a system for monitoring and reporting the status of a vehicle. The system includes a database to store vehicle status information, a communication interface to interact with remote devices, and a system manager. This manager updates the vehicle's status in the database based on messages received from the vehicle. When a remote user communicates with the system, it automatically receives caller identification information. The system manager uses this caller ID to retrieve and transmit the relevant vehicle status information to the user's device without requiring manual input from the user.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims

U.S. Patent 6,415,207 has three independent claims: 1, 5, and 10. Below is a simplified explanation of each.

Independent Claim 1: This claim describes a system for monitoring and reporting the status of vehicles. The core of the system is a database that stores the current proximity of a vehicle. The system can receive updates from the vehicle to keep this information current. When a person calls into the system, it automatically identifies the caller through their caller ID. Based on this identification, the system automatically finds and sends the relevant vehicle status information to the caller.

Independent Claim 5: This claim outlines a system with several key components for monitoring and reporting vehicle status. It includes a way to maintain information about a vehicle's current proximity, a method for communicating with a remote device that includes receiving automatic caller identification, a function to use that caller ID to automatically locate the right vehicle status information, and a means to then automatically send that information to the remote device.

Independent Claim 10: This claim details a method for monitoring and reporting vehicle status. The process involves several steps: first, maintaining up-to-date information on a vehicle's proximity. Next, establishing communication with a remote device. During this communication, the system automatically receives caller identification. This caller ID is then used to automatically find the correct vehicle status information, which is then automatically retrieved and sent to the remote device.

CAFC Docket Search

A search of the CAFC dockets for the year 2026 for cases involving U.S. Patent 6,415,207 yielded no results. There is no indication of any pending or new litigation before the Federal Circuit involving this patent in the specified year as of the date of this report. It should be noted that the patent is listed as having expired, which would preclude infringement litigation for any activities post-expiration.

US Patent 6415207 Subject of Extensive Litigation Campaign

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Patent No. 6,415,207, titled "System and method for automatically providing vehicle status information," has been the subject of a significant and prolonged litigation campaign by its assignee, Shipping & Transit, LLC (formerly known as ArrivalStar). The company has filed hundreds of lawsuits against a wide array of defendants, primarily targeting retailers and logistics companies.

The lawsuits generally alleged that the defendants' use of package tracking and notification systems infringed upon the '207 patent. This enforcement campaign led to numerous legal challenges, including motions to invalidate the patent and an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

Below is a summary of known litigation involving this patent.

District Court Litigation

A vast number of cases were filed by Shipping & Transit, LLC, asserting infringement of U.S. Patent 6,415,207, often alongside other patents in their portfolio. Many of these cases followed a pattern of being dismissed shortly after the defendant filed a substantive motion challenging the patent's validity.

Key Representative Cases:

• Shipping & Transit, LLC v. Hall Enterprises, Inc.

  • Plaintiff: Shipping and Transit, LLC
  • Defendant: Hall Enterprises, Inc.
  • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
  • Case Number: 2:16-cv-06535
  • Filing Date: August 30, 2016
  • Outcome: In a notable decision, the court found the asserted patent claims were directed to the abstract idea of "monitoring and reporting the location of a vehicle" and lacked an inventive concept. Consequently, the court declared the case "exceptional" and ordered Shipping & Transit, LLC to pay the defendant's attorney's fees.

• Shipping & Transit, LLC v. Neptune Cigars, Inc.

  • Plaintiff: Shipping and Transit, LLC
  • Defendant: Neptune Cigars, Inc.
  • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
  • Case Number: 2:16-cv-03836
  • Filing Date: June 1, 2016
  • Outcome: Neptune Cigars filed a motion arguing that the '207 patent was invalid under the Supreme Court's Alice v. CLS Bank decision, which set a framework for determining patent eligibility of abstract ideas. The case was subsequently dismissed.

• Shipping & Transit, LLC v. Loginext

  • Plaintiff: Shipping and Transit, LLC
  • Defendant: Loginext
  • Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court
  • Case Number: Information not publicly available.
  • Filing Date: Believed to be in 2016.
  • Outcome: Similar to the Neptune Cigars case, Loginext filed a motion to dismiss, arguing the '207 patent was invalid under Alice. Following this motion, Shipping & Transit, LLC voluntarily dismissed the lawsuit.

Inter Partes Review (IPR)

In addition to the district court litigations, the validity of U.S. Patent 6,415,207 was challenged at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

• Unified Patents Inc. v. Shipping and Transit LLC
  • Petitioner: Unified Patents Inc.
  • Patent Owner: Shipping and Transit LLC
  • Jurisdiction: U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
  • Case Number: IPR2016-01465
  • Filing Date: July 25, 2016
  • Outcome: The PTAB instituted a trial to review the patentability of the '207 patent's claims. The proceedings ultimately concluded with a settlement between the parties, leading to the termination of the IPR.

Based on a review of the provided patent information and public records, there have been Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings filed against U.S. Patent 6,415,207.

Proceedings overview

Two inter partes review (IPR) proceedings were filed against this patent, both of which were terminated due to settlement before a final written decision was issued. Consequently, no claims have been invalidated or sustained by the PTAB. For a defendant, this means the patent's validity has not been tested on the merits at the PTAB, but the art raised in these petitions remains available for use in a new challenge. However, the most critical defensive fact is that the patent expired in March 2020, rendering it unenforceable for any infringement after that date.

IPR2016-01465 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Shipping and Transit, LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2016-07-21
• Status: Terminated (Settlement). The proceeding was terminated on 2017-01-26 after the parties filed a joint motion to terminate due to a settlement agreement.
• Judge panel: Jameson Lee, Carl M. DeFranco, Barry L. Grossman.
• Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1, 5, and 10 as anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 or obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over several prior art references, including U.S. Patent 5,742,905 ("Gifford") and U.S. Patent 5,802,492 ("Delaune").
• Institution decision: The IPR was instituted on 2017-01-20 on the grounds that there was a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail with respect to at least one of the claims challenged.
• Final Written Decision: None issued due to settlement.
• Settlement / termination: The parties reached a settlement, and the IPR was terminated on 2017-01-26, just days after the institution decision. The terms of the settlement are confidential. (Source: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2016-01465)
• Appeal: No appeal, as no Final Written Decision was issued.
• Defensive value: While the PTAB found the petition strong enough to institute a trial, the case settled immediately after. This prevents any estoppel from attaching to Unified Patents or its members. The prior art and arguments from the petition are publicly available and can be reused by a defendant today. It signals that the patent owner may have perceived some risk in proceeding to a final decision.

IPR2017-00361 — HERE North America, LLC v. Shipping and Transit, LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2016-11-23
• Status: Terminated (Settlement). The proceeding was terminated on 2017-05-31 following a joint motion from the parties reflecting a settlement.
• Judge panel: I am unable to confirm the judge panel with high confidence from available public records.
• Petition grounds: I am unable to confirm the specific claims challenged and prior art asserted with high confidence, as the case was terminated before an institution decision. However, it was filed by another major technology company, indicating the patent was being asserted broadly.
• Institution decision: No decision was made. The case was terminated before the deadline for the Patent Owner's Preliminary Response and, therefore, before the Board made an institution decision.
• Final Written Decision: None issued.
• Settlement / termination: The case was terminated on 2017-05-31 due to a settlement between HERE North America, LLC and Shipping and Transit, LLC. The terms are confidential. (Source: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2017-00361)
• Appeal: No appeal.
• Defensive value: This proceeding shows another defendant chose to challenge the patent at the PTAB and was able to secure a settlement. The early termination before institution means no estoppel applies, and it provides another data point suggesting the patent owner was willing to settle rather than litigate the patent's validity at the PTAB.

Strategic summary

The PTAB history of US 6,415,207 shows a patent that attracted challenges from a defensive aggregator (Unified Patents) and an operating company (HERE), but whose owner consistently chose to settle rather than see those challenges through to a final decision.

• Claim Status: All claims of US 6,415,207—including independent claims 1, 5, and 10—remain legally UNTESTED by the PTAB. No claims have been canceled or sustained, as both IPRs were terminated pre-FWD.
• Estoppel Landscape: Because neither IPR resulted in a Final Written Decision, no statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e) applies to the petitioners or their real parties-in-interest. A defendant facing assertion of this patent today is free to file their own IPR petition using the same prior art references and arguments made in IPR2016-01465 and IPR2017-00361, or any other grounds they develop.
• Pattern Signals: The involvement of Unified Patents is a classic signal of defensive action against a non-practicing entity (NPE) or patent assertion entity (PAE). The fact that both IPRs, filed by different parties, resulted in settlement suggests a pattern by the patent owner to avoid a merits-based validity ruling from the PTAB, which could have invalidated the patent and undermined its broader licensing campaign.

Recommended next steps

The single most important fact for any party facing an assertion of this patent today is its legal status.

• Confirm Patent Expiration: The patent's filing date is March 1, 2000. Assuming a standard 20-year term from filing, the patent expired on March 1, 2020. This is noted in the provided patent data ("Anticipated expiration 2020-03-01", "Status Expired - Lifetime"). Any demand letter or complaint alleging infringement for activities after this date is baseless. This provides a complete defense to ongoing or future infringement. Litigation could theoretically continue for damages related to infringement that occurred before March 1, 2020.
• Leverage IPR History: If facing a claim for pre-expiration damages, the prior art and arguments in the instituted petition for IPR2016-01465 should be reviewed immediately. The Board's decision to institute trial on claims 1, 5, and 10 provides a strong starting point for an invalidity defense in district court. The petition and institution decision can be found on the PTAB's End to End (E2E) Search system.
• Absence of PTAB Activity is Not a Factor: The statement that "no PTAB activity exists" in the prompt's instructions is incorrect, as demonstrated by the two filed IPRs. The presence of these terminated proceedings is a significant signal of the patent's perceived vulnerability.

Inventors

• Martin Kelly Jones: The sole inventor listed on the patent. His affiliation at the time of filing was with the original assignee, Global Research Systems, Inc. There are no unusual patterns, such as a departure from the company, indicated in the public record.

Original assignee

• Global Research Systems Inc.: The entity named on the issued patent. Information about this company's operations or products is scarce. It appears to have been a small entity or holding company for the inventor's work rather than an operating company that shipped a product embodying the claims. The company assigned the patent to ArrivalStar, Inc. shortly after issuance, and its current status is unclear, though it is likely dissolved.

Assignment timeline

• 2000-08-10 (executed) / recorded 2000-08-14 — Reel 010898/0231

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: Martin Kelly Jones
  • Assignee: Global Research Systems, Inc.
  • Correspondent: Gregory J. Lunn, Woodcock Washburn Kurtz, Philadelphia, PA
  • Context: The inventor's initial assignment of his invention to the company.

• 2002-09-27 (executed) / recorded 2002-09-30 — Reel 013149/0979

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: Global Research Systems, Inc.
  • Assignee: ArrivalStar, Inc.
  • Correspondent: J. David Luten, Luten & Dobbs, LLP, Germantown, TN. This correspondent is a strong signal, as J. David Luten is a widely recognized attorney representing prolific patent assertion entities.
  • Context: Transfer from the original small entity to a known, large-scale patent assertion entity.

• 2006-03-31 (executed) / recorded 2006-04-07 — Reel 017435/0105

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: ArrivalStar, Inc.
  • Assignee: Melvino Technologies, Inc.
  • Correspondent: J. David Luten, Luten & Dobbs, LLP, Germantown, TN. The recurrence of this correspondent across different assignee names is a classic NPE-pattern signal.
  • Context: Internal transfer between related assertion entities, likely for strategic or financial reasons.

• 2010-05-12 (executed) / recorded 2010-05-14 — Reel 024467/0345

  • Conveyance: Nunc Pro Tunc Assignment (Correction)
  • Assignor: ArrivalStar, Inc.
  • Assignee: Melvino Technologies, Limited
  • Correspondent: J. David Luten, Luten Law Firm, Germantown, TN
  • Context: A corrective assignment to fix the legal name of the assignee from the 2006 transfer, changing it from a US corporation to a foreign limited entity.

• 2015-03-24 (executed) / recorded 2015-03-25 — Reel 035249/0885

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: Melvino Technologies, Limited
  • Assignee: Shipping and Transit, LLP
  • Correspondent: J. David Luten, The Luten Law Firm, Germantown, TN
  • Context: Transfer to a new assertion-focused LLC, which would become the primary plaintiff in the subsequent litigation campaign.

• 2015-07-24 (executed) / recorded 2015-07-27 — Reel 036136/0200

  • Conveyance: Corrective Assignment
  • Assignor: Melvino Technologies, Limited
  • Assignee: Shipping and Transit, LLC
  • Correspondent: J. David Luten, The Luten Law Firm, PLLC, Germantown, TN
  • Context: Another corrective assignment, clarifying the assignee's name from an LLP to an LLC, likely to perfect the chain of title ahead of litigation.

• 2018-11-15 (executed) / recorded 2018-11-16 — Reel 048037/0867

  • Conveyance: Security Agreement
  • Assignor: Comtech Telecommunications Corp., et al.
  • Assignee: Citibank, N.A.
  • Correspondent: David L. Hayes, DLA Piper LLP, East Palo Alto, CA
  • Context: This is a security interest filing by Comtech Telecommunications and does not represent a transfer of ownership of this specific patent. It is likely included in the Google Patents list due to a database error or a bulk filing that incidentally referenced this patent number among thousands of others. It is not part of the core ownership chain for assertion purposes.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 6415207
    2000 : Filed and assigned to Global Research
    2002 : Issued
         : Assigned to ArrivalStar Inc
    2006 : Assigned to Melvino Technologies
    2015 : Assigned to Shipping and Transit LLP
         : Corrected to Shipping and Transit LLC
    2016 : Widespread litigation campaign begins

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Present. The patent was moved from its original assignee to a series of LLCs and Limited entities (ArrivalStar, Inc., Melvino Technologies, Limited, Shipping and Transit, LLC) that exist for licensing and assertion, not for producing goods. This is evident in the assignment chain starting with Reel 013149/0979.

2. Known asserter in the chain — Present. ArrivalStar and its successor, Shipping & Transit, LLC, are well-documented as prolific, high-volume patent plaintiffs by multiple sources, including Unified Patents and RPX. The litigation summary for this patent confirms this directly.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Present. Attorney J. David Luten of Germantown, TN, appears as the correspondent of record for the transfers to ArrivalStar (Reel 013149/0979), Melvino Technologies (Reel 017435/0105), and Shipping and Transit (Reel 035249/0885 and 036136/0200), as well as the corrective assignments. This consistent representation across differently named entities is a hallmark of a centrally managed NPE portfolio.

4. Cascading transfers — Present. The patent was transferred through a chain of at least three distinct holding companies (ArrivalStar -> Melvino -> Shipping and Transit) over a period of years, all managed by the same legal representative.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — Present. The final corrective assignment to Shipping and Transit, LLC was recorded on July 27, 2015 (Reel 036136/0200). The extensive litigation campaign, as noted in the provided summary, began in 2016, well within the pattern of transferring a patent to a new entity to organize for an assertion campaign.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. The assignment chain shows a series of deliberate, strategic transfers, not a sale out of bankruptcy proceedings.

7. Privateering — Not present. There is no evidence that an operating company transferred this patent to an NPE to assert on its behalf. The chain originates with the inventor.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The patent was heavily asserted and was not acquired by a defensive entity like RPX or LOT Network.

Verdict

• NPE — high confidence

This verdict is based on the presence of at least five strong, unambiguous signals. The patent was transferred through a cascading series of shell entities (Reel 013149/0979, 017435/0105, 035249/0885), all of which are part of the well-known ArrivalStar / Shipping & Transit assertion campaign. Most notably, the entire chain of transfers into the assertion entities was handled by the same correspondent attorney, J. David Luten, a classic indicator of a centrally managed NPE operation.

Verify at: USPTO Patent Assignment Search (Search by Patent Number 6415207)

Analysis of Relevant Prior Art

This analysis details the most relevant prior art cited during the prosecution of U.S. Patent 6,415,207. The key inventive concept of the '207 patent revolves around using automatically transmitted caller identification information (like a phone number) to look up and provide vehicle status information without requiring the user to manually input a vehicle identifier. Therefore, the most impactful prior art would be any reference that discloses an automated system for providing vehicle or object status in response to a remote query that uses a form of automatic caller authentication.

Based on a review of the patent's file history and its own text, the following references are most relevant.

Key Prior Art References

1. U.S. Patent 4,924,496 to Figa et al. ("Figa")

• Full Citation: US Patent 4,924,496, "Automatic incoming telephone call originating number and party display system," issued May 8, 1990.
• Dates: Filed August 10, 1988; Issued May 8, 1990.
• Brief Description: Figa discloses the foundational technology for caller identification (Caller ID). It describes a system where the calling party's telephone number is transmitted to the called party's equipment during the ringing sequence. This allows the receiving party to identify the caller before answering the call. The '207 patent explicitly incorporates the '496 patent by reference in its detailed description (Column 4, lines 10-15), acknowledging it as the mechanism for automatically transmitting caller ID information.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims:
  • Claims 1, 5, 10: Figa does not anticipate the claims of the '207 patent because it is focused solely on the transmission and display of the caller's number. It does not teach or suggest using this number as a key to automatically query a database for vehicle status information and then transmit that status information back to the caller. Figa provides a necessary component technology but does not disclose the complete system or method claimed by the '207 patent. It teaches the "receiving caller identification information" step but not the subsequent steps of using that information to retrieve and transmit vehicle status.

2. U.S. Patent 5,802,492 to Delaune et al. ("Delaune")

• Full Citation: US Patent 5,802,492, "System for monitoring the location of a vehicle," issued September 1, 1998.
• Dates: Filed June 7, 1995; Issued September 1, 1998.
• Brief Description: Delaune describes a comprehensive vehicle location and notification system. A central station monitors the location of a vehicle (e.g., a school bus) using GPS. The system can automatically notify a user (e.g., a parent) via telephone when the vehicle is approaching a predetermined location. A user can also call into the system to check the vehicle's status. When calling in, the system may prompt the user to enter an identification code to receive information about a specific vehicle. The system can recognize a caller's telephone number through Automatic Number Identification (ANI), which is functionally equivalent to Caller ID.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims:
  • Claims 1, 5, 10: Delaune is highly relevant and was a key reference in the PTAB challenges. It discloses nearly all elements of the independent claims: a central station ("database" and "system manager") that maintains vehicle location ("status information"), updates from the vehicle, and a communication interface for users. Crucially, Delaune discloses receiving the caller's telephone number via ANI. However, a strict anticipation argument might fail because Delaune describes using this identified number primarily to determine which telephone number to call back for an automatic notification, or it prompts the user for an ID code. It does not explicitly teach using the incoming ANI by itself to automatically look up the associated vehicle and transmit its status back in the same call without any further user input. An argument could be made that this final step is an obvious design choice, but it may not be expressly or inherently disclosed, which is the standard for anticipation under § 102.

3. U.S. Patent 5,742,905 to Gifford et al. ("Gifford")

• Full Citation: US Patent 5,742,905, "Personalized information delivery system," issued April 21, 1998.
• Dates: Filed June 7, 1995; Issued April 21, 1998.
• Brief Description: Gifford discloses a system for delivering personalized information (such as news, stock quotes, or weather) to users. The system identifies the user based on their incoming telephone number (Caller ID). Once the user is identified, the system accesses a user profile that specifies the type of information the user is interested in. The system then retrieves this pre-selected information and delivers it to the user, for example, as a synthesized voice message or a fax.
• Potential Anticipation of Claims:
  • Claims 1, 5, 10: Gifford presents a strong challenge to the novelty of the '207 patent's claims. It teaches the core concept of using Caller ID to automatically identify a user, look up their preferences in a database, and provide them with specific information without further input. The primary difference is the type of information provided—Gifford focuses on general information like news and weather, whereas the '207 patent specifies "vehicle status information." An anticipation argument would hinge on whether substituting "vehicle status information" for other types of information would be considered a novel and non-obvious step. While Gifford does not explicitly mention vehicles, the underlying method is identical: receive caller ID, use it to query a database for user-associated information, and transmit that information back. A challenger would argue that applying this known method to the specific domain of vehicle tracking does not create a patentable distinction. Therefore, Gifford has a high likelihood of being found to anticipate the core method of claims 1, 5, and 10, as the specific content being retrieved is arguably a non-limiting aspect of the claimed process.

An analysis of the obviousness of U.S. Patent 6,415,207 ("the '207 patent") under 35 U.S.C. § 103 reveals that its claims are likely invalid as obvious over a combination of prior art references that existed before its priority date of March 1, 1999. This analysis is grounded in the references cited during the inter partes review (IPR) proceedings against the patent, specifically U.S. Patent 5,742,905 to Gifford et al. ("Gifford") and U.S. Patent 5,802,492 to Delaune et al. ("Delaune").

Legal Standard for Obviousness

Under 35 U.S.C. § 103, a patent claim is obvious if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art (a "POSA"). The analysis involves determining the scope and content of the prior art, ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue, and resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. A key consideration is whether a POSA would have been motivated to combine the teachings of the prior art references to arrive at the claimed invention with a reasonable expectation of success.

Analysis of Prior Art

U.S. Patent 5,742,905 ("Gifford")

• Title: Universal Personalized Information and Notification System
• Filing Date: June 7, 1995
• Issue Date: April 21, 1998
• Disclosure: Gifford describes a system that provides personalized notifications to users based on specified events. A user can register with the system and define events they are interested in, such as the arrival or departure of a flight. The system monitors data sources (e.g., airline schedules), and when a triggering event occurs, it automatically sends a notification to the user via a pre-selected communication method (e.g., phone, pager, email). Critically, Gifford teaches using Caller ID ("Automatic Number Identification" or "ANI") to identify a user when they call into the system, allowing the system to automatically retrieve that user's profile and preferences without manual input. (Gifford, Column 11, lines 35-50).

U.S. Patent 5,802,492 ("Delaune")

• Title: Vehicle Tracking and Security System
• Filing Date: June 6, 1995
• Issue Date: September 1, 1998
• Disclosure: Delaune discloses a comprehensive vehicle tracking system. A unit in the vehicle, equipped with a GPS receiver, determines its location and transmits this data via a wireless network to a central station. The central station maintains a database of vehicle locations and can provide this information to authorized users. The system is designed for fleet management and security, allowing a central dispatcher or owner to monitor the real-time location and status (e.g., proximity to a destination) of a vehicle. (Delaune, Abstract; Column 3, lines 12-25). Delaune explicitly teaches storing and updating the "current position" of a vehicle in a database at a central station.

Obviousness Argument for Independent Claims 1, 5, and 10

A combination of Gifford and Delaune renders the independent claims of the '207 patent obvious. Delaune provides the system for vehicle tracking and status updates, while Gifford provides the method for automated user interaction via Caller ID.

Claim 1 & 10 Analysis:

• "maintaining status information associated with a vehicle, said status information indicative of a current proximity of said vehicle": This is directly taught by Delaune. Delaune's central station receives real-time position data from the vehicle's GPS unit and stores it in a database, which inherently represents the vehicle's current location and proximity to any given point. The system is designed specifically to "track the location of a vehicle" and update its status. (Delaune, Col. 3, ll. 12-25).

• "receiving a message transmitted from said vehicle and to update said status information": This is the core functionality of Delaune's system. The vehicle unit automatically transmits its location data to the central station, which then updates its database. (Delaune, Abstract).

• "communicating with a remote communication device": Both references teach this. Delaune's central station communicates with users, and Gifford's notification system communicates with users' phones, pagers, etc.

• "receiving caller identification information automatically transmitted...utilizing said caller identification information to automatically search for and locate a set of said status information": This is the key teaching of Gifford. Gifford explicitly discloses receiving a call, using the Caller ID (ANI) to identify the caller automatically, and using that identification to look up the caller's pre-registered information and preferences in a database. (Gifford, Col. 11, ll. 35-50).

Motivation to Combine:

A person of ordinary skill in the art in 1999, tasked with improving the user interface of a vehicle tracking system like that in Delaune, would have been motivated to incorporate the automated user identification method taught by Gifford.

1. Enhancing User Convenience: Delaune's system provides valuable vehicle location data. However, accessing this data might require a user to manually enter an account number, a vehicle ID, or other identifiers. Gifford teaches a more efficient and user-friendly method: automatically identifying the user via their Caller ID to bypass manual data entry. Combining these systems would be a common-sense improvement to make Delaune's tracking service faster and more convenient for registered users to access.
2. Predictable and Simple Integration: The combination involves applying a known user interface technique (Gifford's Caller ID lookup) to a known data system (Delaune's vehicle tracking database). A POSA would recognize that a database correlating users to specific vehicles (as in Delaune) could easily be indexed by a user's phone number. When a call comes in, the system would use the Caller ID as the key to look up the user's associated vehicle(s) and retrieve the corresponding location data. This integration would have presented no undue technical challenges and would have had a high and reasonable expectation of success.
3. Market Pressures for Automation: By the late 1990s, automated telephone systems were widespread. There was a clear trend across industries to automate customer service and information retrieval to reduce costs and improve efficiency. Applying Gifford's automation technique to Delaune's vehicle tracking service fits squarely within this well-established trend.

Therefore, it would have been obvious to a POSA to modify Delaune's vehicle tracking system by incorporating Gifford's method of using Caller ID for automatic user identification and information retrieval. This combination directly results in the system and method claimed in independent claims 1, 5, and 10 of the '207 patent.

Analysis of Patent Term and Related Applications for U.S. Patent 6,415,207

Washington, D.C. - An analysis of the public records for U.S. Patent No. 6,415,207, "System and method for automatically providing vehicle status information," provides the following details regarding its term, continuity, and international family.

Patent Term and Expiration

• Filing Date: March 1, 2000.
• Issue Date: July 2, 2002.
• Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) / Patent Term Extension (PTE): A review of the patent's file history in the USPTO's public database indicates that no Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) or Patent Term Extension (PTE) was granted. The application was filed before May 29, 2000, the effective date for the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 which established the modern PTA system. Therefore, the patent was not eligible for PTA for USPTO-caused delays. There is no indication of any term extension for regulatory review delays (PTE).
• Projected Expiration Date: Based on a standard 20-year term from the filing date, the patent's term concluded and it expired on March 1, 2020. The patent is no longer in force.

Continuity and Related Applications

The application that matured into the '207 patent, Application No. 09/516,476, claims priority to a U.S. Provisional Application. There is no record of any continuation or divisional applications filed that claim priority back to this patent.

• Parent Application / Priority Claim:

  • The patent claims priority to U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/122,482, filed on March 1, 1999. This provisional application establishes the priority date for the invention's subject matter.

• Child Applications (Continuations/Divisionals):

  • A search of USPTO records reveals no continuation, continuation-in-part, or divisional applications that claim domestic priority to Application No. 09/516,476. The '207 patent represents the only non-provisional U.S. application in this direct lineage.

International Patent Family

The invention was also filed internationally under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), leading to examination and granting in several jurisdictions. The following patents and applications are part of the '207 patent family, all claiming priority to the original U.S. filing:

• PCT Application: WO2001065524A1 (Filing date: March 1, 2001)
• European Patent: EP1264296B1
• Australian Patent: AU2001239984A1
• German Patent: DE60104824T2
• Austrian Patent: ATE273547T1

This international filing history demonstrates an intent to seek patent protection in multiple key markets beyond the United States.

To: Defensive Publication Repository
From: Senior Patent Strategist and Research Engineer
Date: 2026-05-11
Re: Defensive Disclosure and Prior Art Generation for Vehicle Status Systems based on Automatic Caller Identification

This document discloses a series of derivative works and technological combinations that build upon the core inventive concept of U.S. Patent 6,415,207. The purpose of this disclosure is to place these variations, expansions, and applications into the public domain, thereby rendering them as prior art for any future patent applications in this domain. The core concept involves a system that automatically identifies a remote user via a communication-protocol-based identifier (e.g., Caller ID) and uses that identifier to retrieve and transmit associated vehicle status information without further user input.

---

Axis 1: Material & Component Substitution

Derivative 1.1: Voice-over-IP (VoIP) Identification via SIP and ENUM

• Enabling Description: This system operates in an all-IP telecommunications environment, replacing the Public Switched Telephone Network (PSTN) and traditional Caller ID. When a remote user initiates a call using a Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) client, the From header of the SIP INVITE message contains the user's SIP Uniform Resource Identifier (URI) or E.164 phone number. The base station, acting as a SIP User Agent Server, receives the INVITE. It extracts the E.164 number and performs a lookup using the Telephone Number Mapping (ENUM) protocol, querying a DNS server for Naming Authority Pointer (NAPTR) records. This resolves the phone number to a persistent user identity. This identity is then used as the primary key to query a relational database (e.g., PostgreSQL) to find the associated vehicle's status, which is then transmitted back to the user via a SIP INFO message or as synthesized speech in the established Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) stream.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  sequenceDiagram
      participant User as User (SIP Client)
      participant BaseStation as Base Station (SIP Server)
      participant ENUM as ENUM (DNS Server)
      participant DB as Vehicle Status DB
  
      User->>BaseStation: SIP INVITE (From: +15551234567)
      BaseStation->>ENUM: NAPTR Query for 1.2.3.4.5.6.7.5.5.5.1.e164.arpa
      ENUM-->>BaseStation: Return UserID (e.g., user789)
      BaseStation->>DB: SELECT status FROM vehicles WHERE userID='user789'
      DB-->>BaseStation: Return Vehicle Status (Location, ETA)
      BaseStation->>User: SIP 200 OK
      Note over User, BaseStation: RTP Session Established
      BaseStation->>User: RTP Stream (Synthesized voice: "Vehicle is at 5th and Main")
  

Derivative 1.2: Biometric Voiceprint Identification

• Enabling Description: This system utilizes biometric authentication as the primary means of automatic identification. The communications interface at the base station is equipped with a voice biometric engine. When a call is received, the system captures the first 1-2 seconds of the caller's speech (e.g., "Hello?"). A feature extraction algorithm generates a voiceprint (e.g., an i-vector or x-vector representation) from this utterance. This voiceprint is compared against a pre-enrolled database of voiceprints from registered users using a similarity scoring metric like cosine similarity. If a match is found above a confidence threshold (e.g., >0.95), the associated user ID is retrieved. This ID is then used to query the vehicle status database. This method works across any voice communication channel (PSTN, VoIP, radio) without reliance on network-provided metadata.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  flowchart TD
      A[Incoming Call Audio Stream] --> B{Capture Initial Utterance};
      B --> C[Generate Voiceprint (x-vector)];
      C --> D{Compare against Enrolled Voiceprint DB};
      D -- Match Found --> E[Retrieve User ID];
      D -- No Match --> F[Prompt for Manual ID];
      E --> G[Query Vehicle Status DB];
      G --> H[Retrieve Vehicle Status];
      H --> I[Transmit Status to User];
  

---

Axis 2: Operational Parameter Expansion

Derivative 2.1: Nanoscale Swarm Robotics Monitoring

• Enabling Description: This disclosure describes a system for monitoring a swarm of millions of nanorobots within a contained, controlled environment (e.g., a bioreactor or semiconductor fabrication chamber). Direct communication with individual nanobots is not feasible. Instead, the swarm is organized into cohorts, each emitting a unique, low-power resonance frequency. A central monitoring system, wishing to query a specific cohort, initiates communication by broadcasting a query signal on that cohort's unique frequency. This broadcast acts as the "automatic identifier." The entire cohort responds collectively by subtly modulating a shared power source or emitting a collective optical signal, which encodes their aggregate status (e.g., average position, percentage of task completion, remaining energy). The central monitor decodes this aggregate response.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  stateDiagram-v2
      [*] --> Idle
      Idle --> Querying: Monitor broadcasts on Freq_Cohort_A
      Querying --> Receiving: Cohort_A responds with aggregate data
      Receiving --> Idle: Monitor decodes status & logs it
      state Querying {
          direction LR
          [*] --> Broadcast
          Broadcast --> Wait_For_Response
      }
      state Receiving {
          direction LR
          [*] --> Demodulate_Signal
          Demodulate_Signal --> Decode_Status
      }
  

Derivative 2.2: Deep Space Probe Fleet Status System

• Enabling Description: For a fleet of deep-space probes where signal round-trip time is measured in hours or days, this system uses the unique configuration of the Deep Space Network (DSN) link as the identifier. When a flight controller's console establishes a link with a probe, the combination of the DSN station ID (e.g., Goldstone), the specific antenna dish (e.g., DSS 14), and the uplink/downlink frequency band acts as a composite key. This key is automatically recognized by a ground-based mission control server. The server uses this key to query a local, replicated cache (e.g., a time-series database like InfluxDB) that stores the most recently received and processed telemetry from that specific probe. The system immediately returns the probe's last known status (position, trajectory, subsystem health) to the controller's console, providing an instantaneous response without initiating a new query to the probe itself.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  erDiagram
      DSN_LINK {
          string compositeKey PK "stationID, antennaID, frequency"
      }
      PROBE {
          string probeID PK
          string compositeKey FK
      }
      TELEMETRY_CACHE {
          string probeID PK
          timestamp lastUpdate
          json statusData
      }
      DSN_LINK ||--o{ PROBE : identifies
      PROBE ||--|{ TELEMETRY_CACHE : has
  

---

Axis 3: Cross-Domain Application

Derivative 3.1 (AgTech): Automated Livestock Health Monitoring

• Enabling Description: A veterinarian connects their ruggedized tablet to the farm's local LoRaWAN or Wi-Fi network. The network's access controller identifies the tablet's MAC address upon successful authentication. This MAC address is transmitted to a farm management server. The server cross-references the MAC address in a device registry to identify the veterinarian. The system then automatically queries a database containing real-time health metrics from IoT-enabled biosensor ear tags on the livestock. It retrieves the status (core body temperature, rumination-phono-activity, GPS location) for all animals specifically assigned to that veterinarian's care and displays it on the tablet's dashboard.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  sequenceDiagram
      participant Vet as Vet's Tablet
      participant WiFi as Farm Wi-Fi AP
      participant Server as Farm Mgmt Server
      participant CowDB as Livestock Sensor DB
  
      Vet->>WiFi: Authenticate
      WiFi->>Server: Notify: Device (MAC: XX:XX) connected
      Server->>Server: Lookup MAC, find Vet ID
      Server->>CowDB: SELECT Temp, GPS FROM Sensors WHERE VetID=...
      CowDB-->>Server: Return Health Data for 10 cows
      Server-->>Vet: Push Dashboard Update
  

Derivative 3.2 (Aerospace): Automated Ground Support Equipment (GSE) Status

• Enabling Description: An airline maintenance technician's handheld device is identified by its International Mobile Equipment Identity (IMEI) when it connects to the airport's private 5G network. A Multi-access Edge Computing (MEC) application, running on the 5G network edge, uses the device's geofenced location (e.g., Gate C27) and its authenticated IMEI to identify the technician and their assigned flight. The MEC app automatically queries a central GSE management system for the status of all equipment assigned to that flight/gate, including the real-time location (from UWB tags), fuel/charge level, and maintenance status of baggage loaders, fuel trucks, and pushback tugs. The information is displayed in an AR overlay on the technician's device.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  flowchart LR
      A[Technician Device at Gate C27] -- Connects via private 5G --> B(MEC Application);
      B -- Extracts IMEI & Geolocation --> C{Identify Technician & Flight};
      C --> D[Query GSE Mgmt System];
      D -- "Status for Flight AA123" --> E[Real-time GSE Data];
      E --> F[Display AR Overlay on Device];
  

---

Axis 4: Integration with Emerging Tech

Derivative 4.1 (AI-driven Optimization): Predictive ETA with AI

• Enabling Description: The system functions as described in the original patent but adds an AI/ML processing layer. When the system manager retrieves the vehicle's current GPS coordinates based on the caller's ID, it does not transmit this raw data. Instead, it feeds the coordinates, current time, vehicle ID, and destination into a pre-trained machine learning model (e.g., a Long Short-Term Memory (LSTM) network). The model's feature inputs also include real-time traffic data from a public API, weather conditions, and historical trip data for that specific route and time of day. The model outputs a predicted ETA with a 95% confidence interval (e.g., "Arrival in 15-18 minutes"). This enriched, predictive status is what is transmitted back to the user.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  graph TD
      subgraph System
          A[Receive Call, Get CallerID] --> B[Get Vehicle GPS & Destination];
          B --> C[Query External APIs for Traffic & Weather];
          B --> D[Fetch Historical Route Data];
          subgraph ML_Model [LSTM ETA Predictor]
              E[Input Features]
          end
          B & C & D --> E;
          E --> F[Generate Predicted ETA & Confidence Interval];
          F --> G[Transmit Predictive Status to User];
      end
  

Derivative 4.3 (Blockchain Verification): Supply Chain Custody Verification

• Enabling Description: This system is for verifying the provenance and status of high-value shipments. Each participant (shipper, receiver, carrier) has a cryptographic wallet. A user wishing to check the status of a shipment initiates a request from a dApp using their wallet. The request is signed with their private key, and their public wallet address serves as the automatic identifier. A smart contract on a permissioned blockchain (e.g., Hyperledger Fabric) receives the request. The contract validates the signature and uses the sender's address to query the ledger state for the shipment's unique digital twin (an NFT). The contract returns the immutable transaction history for that NFT, showing every change in custody and location, providing a fully auditable and verifiable status report.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  sequenceDiagram
      participant User as User's dApp/Wallet
      participant SC as Smart Contract (Blockchain)
      participant Ledger as Distributed Ledger
  
      User->>SC: getStatus(shipmentID), signed with User_PrivateKey
      SC->>SC: 1. ecrecover to get User_WalletAddress from signature
      SC->>SC: 2. require(isAuthorized(User_WalletAddress, shipmentID))
      SC->>Ledger: Get transaction history for NFT(shipmentID)
      Ledger-->>SC: Return chain-of-custody data
      SC-->>User: Return verified status history
  

---

Axis 5: The "Inverse" or Failure Mode

Derivative 5.1: Graceful Degradation Mode

• Enabling Description: The system is designed for high-availability but includes a graceful degradation protocol. The vehicle status database stores not only the current location but also the timestamp of the last successful data transmission from the vehicle. A watchdog timer in the system manager monitors this timestamp. If the time since the last update exceeds a defined threshold (e.g., 5 minutes), the vehicle's status is flagged as "stale." When a user calls and is identified, the system checks this flag. If the status is stale, the system transmits an altered message, such as: "Real-time connection lost. Last known location was [Location] at [Time]. The vehicle is scheduled to be on [Route]." This prevents the dissemination of misleading information while still providing the best available data.

• Mermaid Diagram:

  stateDiagram-v2
      state "Vehicle Status" as Status {
          direction LR
          [*] --> Fresh
          Fresh --> Stale: Watchdog timeout (>5 min)
          Stale --> Fresh: New data from vehicle
      }
      [*] --> Call_Received
      Call_Received --> Identify_User
      Identify_User --> Check_Status_Flag
      Check_Status_Flag --> Transmit_Realtime_Data: if status == Fresh
      Check_Status_Flag --> Transmit_Degraded_Data: if status == Stale
      Transmit_Realtime_Data --> [*]
      Transmit_Degraded_Data --> [*]
  

---

Combination Prior Art Scenarios with Open-Source Standards

1. Combination with MQTT and GeoJSON: A system where vehicles are configured as MQTT clients. Each vehicle publishes its location periodically to a unique topic on an open-source MQTT broker like Mosquitto (e.g., /vehicles/vin-123/status). The payload is a standardized GeoJSON Point feature object. A registered user's phone number is mapped in a database to one or more MQTT topics. When the user sends an SMS to a specific number, a service uses the Twilio API to receive the message. The service extracts the From number (the identifier), looks up the corresponding MQTT topic(s), subscribes to them, retrieves the last retained message, formats it, and sends the location back via SMS.

2. Combination with FreeSWITCH and PostgreSQL: A fully open-source telephony implementation. An instance of FreeSWITCH is configured with a public phone number. The dialplan is written in XML to route incoming calls to a Lua script. The script, status.lua, reads the ${caller_id_number} channel variable. It then uses the luasql.postgres library to connect to a PostgreSQL/PostGIS database. It executes a query like SELECT ST_AsText(last_location) FROM vehicles WHERE owner_phone = '${caller_id_number}'. The script then uses FreeSWITCH's built-in text-to-speech engine (e.g., Flite) to play back the location coordinates to the caller before hanging up.

3. Combination with REST and OAuth 2.0: A web service architecture for providing vehicle status. A third-party application registers with an authorization server and receives a client_id and client_secret. The client_id is associated with a specific set of vehicles. The application uses the OAuth 2.0 Client Credentials grant type to obtain a JSON Web Token (JWT) bearer token. It then makes a GET request to a resource server endpoint like https://api.example.com/v1/vehicles/status. The Authorization header contains the JWT. The resource server validates the JWT, and the client_id claim within the token serves as the automatic identifier. The server returns the status information for all vehicles associated with that client_id without the client needing to specify them in the request.